Call for Papers: Federalist Society Article I Initiative Writing Contest on Nondelegation Doctrine

by Christopher J. Walker — Sunday, Sept. 15, 2019@chris_j_walker

From for the Federalist Society website, here are the details on this year’s Article I Initiative Writing Contest:

The Nondelegation Doctrine: Intelligible Principle or Unworkable Standard?

The Federalist Society’s Article I Initiative is focused on the critical issue of why the modern Congress is not functioning as the most powerful branch as envisioned by the Framers. In order to help engage new thought and discussion about the proper role of the Congress, the Initiative has just launched its third annual writing contest aimed at younger* thinkers.

Theme:

The Nondelegation Doctrine: Intelligible Principle or Unworkable Standard?

Description:

Our Constitution vests legislative, executive, and judicial powers in three discrete, separate branches. Can Congress modify this constitutional structure by delegating its power to write laws to the administration? According to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Wayman v. Southard, the answer is no. How then do executive agencies possess the vast regulatory power we witness today? In J.W. Hampton v. United States, the Court held that agencies exercise executive, not legislative, power while writing regulations, so long as they are guided by an “intelligible principle” from Congress.

Whatever its justification, this caveat has proven to be the rule rather than the exception. Examples of the Court invalidating regulations for violating the doctrine laid out in Wayman are rare. However, in Gundy v. United States’ striking dissent, three justices called for the revival of the nondelegation doctrine. With Justice Alito signaling agreement in his opinion concurring with the majority, and Justice Kavanaugh’s recent ascent to the Court, it seems likely the issue will return to the Court’s docket. Is the doctrine in need of resuscitation? What would a revived doctrine look like? What would be its practical effects? And how should Congress prepare if they are forced by the Court to take a more active role in generating regulations?

We hope this contest will cultivate creative ideas that can improve legislative functionality and Constitutional accountability.

Click here to learn more about contest eligibility, rules and how to submit a paper!

Here’s some fine print:

  1. Eligibility. Open to individuals under age 40. Federalist Society employees, board members, contest judges and their families are not eligible to participate.
  2. Subject Matter. Entries must be submitted on the subject of “The Nondelegation Doctrine: Intelligible Principle or Unworkable Standard?”
  3. Authorship, Length, and Publication. Entries must be certified by the entrant on the title page to be the original and sole work of the entrant. Maximum 30 page (7,500 word) essay. At the time of submission, the entry must not have been published or accepted for publication.
  4. Judging. The contest will be judged by a committee of the Article I Initiative, whose decisions will be final.
  5. Monetary Awards. Monetary awards will be made as follows: US $7,000 to the first place winner. US $2,000 to the runner-up winner. US $1,000 to honorable mention winner.
  6. Publication. The Federalist Society retains the right to publish any submitted essays online or in print.
  7. Deadline for Entries. Entries must be received on or before Monday, January 7, 2020.
  8. Directions for Submission. Entries must be double-spaced, in 12pt font and have pages numbered. They must be uploaded to this form.

Cite As: Author Name, Title, 36 Yale J. on Reg.: Notice & Comment (date), URL.

This entry was tagged .

About Christopher J. Walker

Christopher Walker is a law professor at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. Prior to joining the law faculty, Professor Walker clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy of the U.S. Supreme Court and worked on the Civil Appellate Staff at the U.S. Department of Justice. His publications have appeared in the California Law Review, Michigan Law Review, Stanford Law Review, and University of Pennsylvania Law Review, among others. Outside the law school, he serves as one of forty Public Members of the Administrative Conference of the United States and as Chair-Elect of the American Bar Association’s Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice. He blogs regularly at the Yale Journal on Regulation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *